So Trump is now trying to shut down the department of education by executive order. Never mind that this flies in the face of separation of powers and fundamentally undermines Congress, not that they seem to care. It is for Congress to assign funding to programs etc and for the executive to enact them. It is not for the executive to simply decide it doesn't want to fund something, as has been well established since Nixon. If Congress had funded the department of education then that's where the funding must go. Trump is now basically saying that he can just create and dismantle entire government departments on a whim with no need for approval from Congress nor regard for any of the funding or laws Congress has passed.
As usual, Republicans cried about Obama exercising executive orders but are quiet on Trump going much much further than anything Obama did with them. Same thing, their claimed principles don't actually mean anything.
So this isn't my specialty not by a long shot, but 3 points sprint to mind:
1. From what I know he will need congress to fully shut down the DOE, and enough votes from the Senate that Republicans don't have. I'm sure Attorney General will lodge suits too. So there's a decent check for this.
Of course American education is poor, costly and not effective, and this is just a devolution of power away from Washington no?
2. What was it called a 'boondongle'? On inception. Paid homework checkers, that republicans wanted rid of for decades.
If the DoE is bloated ineffective and the same funding for the vulnerable can continue at state level, what is the argument for it?
3. You complain that Republicans will not keep the same energy on this, than when they complained about Obama, and your right, but executive over reach and power increase was all well and good when it was Obama. I thought Republicans days were up when Obama got in, but even so, the short sightedness of this was stunning. Didn't Obama actually accuse Bush of the same thing before his run? It's hardly a new concept, don't clutch your pearls so tightly. The point is, all presidents push the envelope, they all get accused of going too far, one side sets a new precedent, so the next guy uses that new standard. Did you speak out at Obama for lambasting bush, declaring he'll roll back the powers, and then leaning further in when the ball was in his hands?